Sunday, February 27, 2011

Who does the burden of proof lie with?

There are many assertions regarding the safety of the additives used in the hydraulic fracturing process. With varying opinions and differing views, it will soon become apparent that there needs to be a go to agency where communities can put their trust into, to be able to set the threshold margin of safety.  
The recently published NYT article provides the kind of conspiracy-style information that frightens, fascinates and entertains. These are the stories that drive the wedges between the public and any authoritative entity/agency. So, where should the public go for answers: the press? Who should set the bar for safety standards? Is it up to the natural gas industry to prove their ability to be good environmental stewards or is it up the communities to prove unsafe practices or it it up to some public entity? If the public is made to believe that authoritative agencies are not to be trusted then who is responsible for ensuring the public’s safety?
On one hand, this story gives and inside glimpse into the workings of natural gas well
New York Times also recently printed this article. UPS is switching their fleets to Liquefied Natural Gas. My question, exactly where will this *green* natural gas come from, if opponents continue to ban ANY type of natural gas extraction?
“The final frontier for alternative motor fuels, powering big tractor-trailers, has been crossed”.

UPS will add 48 trucks to their fleets... and the march goes on

No comments:

Post a Comment